Thinking about my comments, and those of the others below as to how fans were responding to long jams, it reminded me of my prior efforts, however poorly executed, to subdivide the DEAD into "mini-eras" within the early era (eg, "65=wanna-be pop garage band", "66=dance/blues band", "68=psych band", blah, blah, blah), and the fact that as the SF scene dried up and blew away, the DEAD were the only band standing, to witness the small venues give way to Bill Graham inspired monster productions with > 50k attending...

Putting this all together, while I grant that 72 fans hearing long DS may not have been altogether that removed from the same concert goers that witnessed Fillmore, March 69, there had been the "cowboy tune transition" of 71, and the dropping of any number of early era efforts with the decline of Pig. By 74, and esp 75, when I really began my run, Post Hiatus, they were a very different band, IMHO.

The biz about iconic status: at the four EBay HSs I knew well, fewer than 10% of kids went to shows...and of those, only about 0.25% were heads--we really were in the minority. But, at shows in 75-76, in which the DEAD played reasonably small venues (ie, Winterland was only 5k, and Orpheum fewer), "we" were the crowd...meaning, younger siblings of those that had witnessed the Summer of Love, but by and large, 18-22 yr old kids, it seemed to me. And though we knew LiveDead, it was NOT the sound track to the DEAD we knew and played at parties. And attempted to recruit newbies with...it was Skull & Roses, and the 70 studio masterpieces. I can recall almost never playing LiveDead at parties...buzz kill.

Anyhow, point being, the crowd in the mid to late 70s was made up of younger kids on the West Coast anyway, that were largely divorced from the orig SF sound, except second hand. And the band, as ARose put it, was far from having reached anything "iconic" status wise.

Thus, I don't see there being anything untoward about the fact that we came for the short recognizable songs.

If anyone wants to test a prediction of this theory, listen to the AUD of the Jun 75 show (17th I think); the crowd is MOST animated during BIODTL, with Jerry putting in a nice zip ending to the lead jam in the center, and rather dumbstruck during various components of BlAllah...for the 20 or so folks with me that night, I can testify that M&MU and BIODTL were real highlights...This is a true test of the hypothesis cause I am making this prediction from memory, NOT from listening to it. Seriously.

Anyone know? Is there more clapping for long jams? Of course, we'd only heard BlAllah, part, once before, so that confounds, eh?

I'll let you folks decide how to divide them up post 79, but we wanted high energy tunes, whether short and sweet (generally succeeded), or a little longer, BUT with direction and focus (which again, OOne usu had, as did a 68 Eleven, but not some of the other stuff we heard).

It's a shame that the REALLY old posters here at the Archive (creampuffwar, ghostofpig, skydawg) seem to have dropped out - they'd be able to tell a lot about what early pre-'71 Dead audiences expected & wanted from the band.

While I think a lot of folks in that early era would have come for the jams, probably many of them dropped out (or just became a minority of the audience) by the mid-'70s. Not everyone keeps going to shows for years & years. I know I've read from several early showgoers in the Taping Compendiums that they were disappointed with the Dead's changes by '72 and simply stopped going. (Reasons: the loss of Pigpen, the bigger audiences, the lack of 'adventurousness' in shows, jams becoming less interesting or energetic. If you got hooked in '68 or '69, a '71 show might have been quite a letdown!)

I remember Earl Powell posting once that the "rock" stuff the Dead played in the '70s made more of an impression on young audiences (and was more accessible) than the long, involved jams, which makes sense. (Even though it's the reverse for me! But I'm just listening to a tape, not standing through a 4-hour show....)

Yup; ironic too that GoP and I fit your notion: ie, he went from 67-73, and I went from 74-82, and so and so forth for most that were in the early days, or at least 60s/70s (though I think Cush went from 68 well into the 80s, maybe even 90s?). We have few here that went the distance (all 30 yrs).

And finally, in a way, I am just like you, except that I went to shows in the 70s to hear the short tunes (and a few jams)...Today, I am now a pure jam fan (ie, the past five yrs, due to this place and the fine folks that live here). I do love the acoustic tunes of 1970 though.

To quantify it, revealing the complete reversal I've undertaken from 35 yrs ago: with respect to 80% of my listening, it would be jams of 68-70; ~10% acoustic songs of 70; and ~10% 71 era songs (ie, minimal jams, but some...).

Only my wife claps now when jams end. I won't even mention what happens if somehow, someway, Donna makes an auditory appearance at my house...

The former PM said:"Thus, I don't see there being anything untoward about the fact that we came for the short recognizable songs."

I think along these lines, I have heard support for this statement in 78-82ish aud where someone next to the mic keeps yellin' for, gasp, "Passenger". Personally, I've always liked the song and, I think, so did the crowds at that time. So is it that those audiences didn't know a good song from a bad or is that, now looking back, the forumites are able to discern that this song does not deserve respect? (I am making the assumption that the general feeling in this forum is that "Passenger" sucked. This assumption itself may just be me weighting too heavily the shrill and loud cry of a few later-haters.) Which kind of brings up another point.

There have been statements that shows in the early and mid 80's sucked and it is a fact because such persons attended many of these shows. Well, did they think the shows sucked at the time but continued to attend---isn't that akin to continually slamming your hand in the door and bitching about the pain? Why did they insist on torturing themselves?

Or, is it only in hindsight and after gorging at the Archive's trough that they realized, "Whoa, 68 was Chateau Lafitte and those 85 shows were Ripple with two scoops of dog turd"?

I don't know. I know my preferences have changed in the years I have been here from what I arrived with. I guess Tell just got me thinking and I thought I would share.

Hmmm, do I get some sort of bonus pts for "quitting" Cold Turkey, in 82?

Seriously, though, I did it primarily cause the venues, a la Bill Graham Monster sized productions, were just not my cup of tea, as much for a sense at the time that I felt they weren't as good as they used to be...I don't recall really being a "Brent Hater" (he wasn't singing much then as I recall), so that wasn't it either...combination of things.

But I did distinctly feel that overall, they were past their prime at some level, and though I know so many disagree with me about it, I felt they were already playing more because they "had to" than wanted to...I know, I know, it was much later Jerry talks of feeding the beast, and supporting the families and all, but I felt, in summary, the 1) scene was changing for the worse, and 2) the band was wearing itself out...

Personally I always loved Passenger and never understood why they stopped playing it after the '81 New Years run. It was a great hard rocking song with numerous built-in Phil bombs and some great raw slide licks by Jerry. It was often one of the highlights of the first set and it almost always got the crowd moving even more than they already were. Nothing wrong with a short, power chord driven, rockin' tune to really wake the crowd up!! I can't find the post, but we've had discussions about Passenger before here, and, if memory serves, it seemed that most folks here actually liked the song.

LOL! That sums it up. It's a very peculiar feature of deadhead land, these folks with their encyclopedic, intimate knowledge of the band and love for the band, who could not possibly be more passionately devoted to the band, yet spend a large amount of time insisting that great, huge swaths of the music are terrible.

It is unique, isn't it? I mean at the Jack Bruce worship services I attend, no one, and I mean no one, says this or that part of CREAM "sucked" (well...except for "Anyone for Tennis?")...but, they do often say that post CREAM JB or GB sucked to some extent...so perhaps it's simply the DEAD kept on for 30 yrs. And kids that went in 95 have to say it was great, at some level, right?

I, however, would admit that CREAM sucked in 95 if they had, but they didn't, so I don't (LiA's comments about 2005 not withstanding).

I suppose I thought it was melodramatic? Har, har...ie, overthetop in precisely the respect you note. To make those points I would prefer a bit more depth? Dunno...but the main reason I don't care for it is it's such a departure; they should've stuck to blues or high energy, or both, in my very objective opinion.

Without taking my normal route and first looking up the lyrics, I just have to say I always liked the song too. In fact, my brother and I played all the Cream albums with great affection and awe – the longer live jams and even the silly ditties.

Anyone for tennis, wouldn’t that be nice? It makes me smile because I interpreted it to refer to being in an altered state – pick your substance – and laughing at the impossibility of engaging in something challenging while in that condition.

The words to their original songs were usually obscure and often goofy, and weren’t written by the three themselves. What made them truly great was their cohesive capacity to jam together.

I have no intention of furthering a highjack of your original post (albeit knowing the subject matter wouldn’t bother you !) yet I had this thought, and maybe we can return to this in a future (non-dead) thread. My experience with Cream has only been through the albums, and I did pick up a used copy of the box set a few years ago, and of course the fantastic reunion dvd. I’m not too knowledgeable, (I did give it a brief search effort) but I’d imagine many of the tracks on the studio albums were likely rarely performed in live performances. Possibly the cover songs they performed were more favored. I have not had the pleasure of hearing recordings of shows like you have reported before – and I am rapidly losing track of what I was trying to say. To be continued... :)

Cream performed few of their studio tracks live. Most of Fresh Cream, those were their 'core' tunes, and just a few additions from Disraeli & Wheels. The live tracks on the box set actually cover almost every song they did live. In their early days they did a few others, but their setlists were generally the same few songs over & over. Just the music changed....

Scholarship. I felt ok leaving you with the last word. Facebook. I wonder(ed) if I should post a reply. (A ‘thank you’ would be redundant.) Comedy. My therapist tells me it’s ok to keep trying.Chaos. Fail every time. But I so want to be one of the gang.

I am lovin' tennis right now . My family is giving me a welcome home dinner tonight after mucho US Open ( the most favorite time of year ). Annie in Philly understands . Her family gets take out and no clean clothes till Sunday . I'm not that hardcore .Not sure about the men , but Caro will lift her first grand slam trophy up Sat. night . What a smile .

It just becomes comical. Kids who went in '95 have to say it was great, but, erm, kids who went in '68 have to say it was great, too! The early-era purists can easily see that those who attended in other eras were biased by the good times they had at the shows ... yet don't seem to have thought about how the good times they had at the shows influenced them! Whereas, you've got to admit, those who went to later shows for the most part couldn't possibly have gone to earlier shows (being too young, or not even born), yet, they acknowledge the value in the earlier music. (Rarely do we hear anyone say they actually DISLIKE early Dead, or that the music got BETTER around, say, 1992.)

If you followed all that - boy, I'm rivaling you for convoluted argumentation :) - there's an argument to be made that the younger crowd is actually more objective about the music. The counterargument of course is that the earlier music was simply better. I happen to think that's true, but am also amused by the, er, lack of objectivity of the elders sometimes.

I am the most objective person that you know; trust me on this...well...no, really. I offer as evidence: I went in 74-82, I liked them fine; I defended them against all comers. I arrived here; heard the early era, and said "hmmm, this is better".

I had good times, but objectively, the shows I heard, by the same band, were simply not as good as the shows I hear here from the early days. Objective criteria? Energy + vocals + song writing. Now of course, it's still "subjective" in terms of art appreciation, and you and me don't need to go there (again!), of course, but I say from a DEAD fan's perspective, one who went at one time period, but prefers another, that that counts for something, right?

I don't know what it counts for, but I am counting it.

[by the way, I followed everything you wrote, which is either something for you to be very worried about, or it means you have to try harder]

will tell, you in particular seems to nail it just about all the time. I did stir the pot the other day w/ my utterdisappointment post. Truth be told you never ever knew whatyou were going to get on any given show. I'll repeat that I've been there in S.F. from 72 on to 83 and the quality of shows so varied that's why it's so damn frustating to mebecause the potential was always there. I also preferedinside night gigs to the DAY ON THE GREEN BG shows.3out the 15 run at the Warfield was perfectly balanced shows w/ the split sets.

Thanks for those kind words; I don't know what all the fuss was about...clearly we are here not to just sing their praises. That would get old fast. And, as we know, the unexamined life ain't worth living, so if you don't extend that critical lens to your art appreciation efforts, I don't really see how you can derive great pleasure from it. Of course, this is my oft-repeated stance round here, so nothing new; but, to me, the only "no-no's" are generally agreed upon off topic posts that go against the grain of the unstated "Forum Sensibilities", and Trolling. Yours didn't seem to be either of those.

I'm just saying that if you hang around this place for awhile, it becomes harder and harder to view deadheads as "objective" about the music in any way! I'm not objective either I'm sure. A friend told me a few days ago that he views my preoccupation with the Grateful Dead as "psychosis" ... (and he's a deadhead himself).

Not one or two or three different eras by my time WT , but eras seemingly stacked one upon the other reaching so high it seemed like the Tower of Babel . Confusion , derision , your blood pumping so fast just driving into the lot it felt like you had needles instead of blood in your veins . The hoards of us teenyboppers had No clue . Piss in a bush . Sleep in a yard . Steal from a garden . Buy the 'opium' ( if you did not know it was low grade cheap , swept off the floor , heroin ) and the Purple Windowpane . I am shocked there were not more deaths . Young , stupid and out of control . I wonder why you older heads came up w/ TH ? Endearment ? It must have been one of us next to you shouting , "When Push Comes To Shove " , before the second set .GD were a huge puzzle piece to me . Most bands have a few moves , but there are only so many times you can go around the same track . GD seemed endless . A true rabbit hole . The music . The attitude . The history . The lovely ladies . The scene . The tapes .It was intoxicating in of itself .

When you are a youngster, the rockers are the ones that stick with you , they get your attention . Some people never get beyond that . The first time I saw them ( 10/14/76) it was the 'Around" that got me , not the long "Dancin>Wharf Rat ( my buddy fell asleep )! The next concert (2/26/77), I was impressed with the 'US Blues, and the short Weir tunes, not the 'Playing>Wheel>Playing', or the 'Help>Slip>Frank' ... what a dumbshit ... didn't even know I had heard a 'Help>Slip' till I got the tape !I will say I was intrigued by this band that did not play what you expected ( no "Truckin', Casey Jones ), while most of the other bands I saw, you could guess pretty much what song was going to end the show, and what the encore would then be . These guys were not playing by the rules . They always had a little "play to the audience' , I mean they ARE a Rock&Roll band ; but if you stuck with them, you got the longer , more involved, subtle stuff . I think this worked in their favor, in the long run ... look at all of us !As for being "dumbstruck", how I wish that happened more often ! I think the latter,"party over everything else" factor, made it difficult to listen to the more introspective parts of the Dead's music . This was more a factor later on, and is shockingly so now, but you still hear noisy clueless, audiences back in the "good old days " also, just not as much .

Couldn't folks also have come for both? Our eras aren't that different (except I guess that you started in high school ... which, come to think of it, could make a difference in initial approach), but right from the beginning, I have distinct memories of being really moved and effected by specific long, introspective tunes that did involve a fair amount of jamming or "noodling."

Yet I doubt I was clapping and cheering; probably just seemed to be sitting there dumbstruck, I guess. I'd get more visibly enthused, I'm sure, when I recognized a favorite tune. I think that's what a lot of the cheering probably was, perhaps in any era: the fun game of name-that-tune.

Certainly the Happy Dances would have had me more outwardly excited; the freedom to dance was something that was really special, and kind of spoiled me for other rock concerts in big venues where people just sat like blobs.

But I always thought of the GD as psychedelic first, and the jamming was how that manifested, with the dances kind of coming out of that -- a release, or a reaction, or going into another mode, if that makes sense. Which is one reason the shows and music was (and is) intriguing: a lot happens in the space of a few hours. I imagine that was part of what drew a lot of the audience in any era.

I also don't quite think there was necessarily such a gulf between the 60s and the late 70s. It seemed a long time in the past at the time, in the sense of "oh, I missed the fun," yet it also still seemed relevant rather than retro; the Dead seemed to show it was still continuing in an underground kind of way. I do think that morphed into a kind of reinvention of the 60s, or enactment of an iconic or imagined 60s, later on. While I certainly recall a hippie vibe at early shows, I don't recall a lot of tie dye, for instance. I think of that as coming on the scene later, maybe around 85, just pre-Touchhead, though I could be off. And I'm sure that vision of the 60s meant something about what folks brought to the shows when they first came ... but I tend to think that people were ending up in the same place with the music, regardless of the era.

Ha--I was a dedicated head by sixth grade...just couldn't go to a concert til I was in HS.

Oh sure, I imagine some folks were there for the jams, but was just describing that Capn Cook had a point yesterday...ie, jams in the late 70s were not the same as the early days. Think of an Eleven vs space...apples and oranges.

But, all this jam bashing is besides the pt; I think that clapping in general was for "recognition" as you note...the start of a song, OR recognition/reward for an outstanding solo or some such.

And was by extension expounding on the "short song" preference, at least among my odd little group, that went in the mid to late 70s...

Thus, back to CCook's pt: "is clapping at the end of a long jam once a few chords have been played 'thanks' for the jam or 'thanks' for starting the next song?" and my vote is it was often for the latter...dunno the %, but it fits your "name the tune!" game which we ALL did ALL the time, and so did BD and HFlow by their own admission.

I'm with you on that point. Also would judge by the behavior during a long jam later on - lots more beach-ball tossing, bathroom breaks, light another fatty for entertainment, etc. Especially agree: " jams in the late 70s were not the same as the early days. Think of an Eleven vs space...apples and oranges." I do enjoy drum solos, but they better be good and to the point, 3-4 minutes seems more than enough time, whereas a good rendition of The Eleven would have riveted me totally.

Maybe it would be clearer if we gave the mini-eras fruit names, since it's apples and oranges, but also peaches and pears and bananas and ... what does, say, 85 get? Kiwi, for the fozziness? Are the last few years a persimmon?

What was most enjoyable about your late 70's, early 80's DEAD experiences? Did you still go for the short rocking tunes played well with high energy solos?

Often, when I listen to shows from this vintage I am often drawn by an unusually long (for the era) Playin' or a second set sandwich or flow of songs, hoping for some new harmonic form to emerge out of the predetermined structure of songs they'd been playing more or less the same way for a long time. I guess this was rare so you did not go hoping for this sort of thing but appreciated it when it happened?

Did you enjoy Althea at all? Thought you might be one to appreciate the latter era brilliance of Garcia/Hunter on this tune.

Hey, I am just glad at the close of the third quarter we are beating the russkies in FIBA, with our "replacement team"...whewww...lets hope it holds up. 38 yrs ago I lived and died with the three time replay of the last 3 seconds; I did become a huge fan of Doug Collins as a result, regardless of what he does to his hair these days, I will forever appreciate the fact that he won that game in the Olympics...

My grandfather was on the Red Army basketball team, starting point guard... they used to go around playing other base's teams and clubs teams, etc. That's how he spent a good deal of his mandatory military service!